The government is considering introducing a law to ban parents smoking in front of their children. This radical crack-down would help government agencies reach targets for reducing the number of smokers in the UK. 80,000 people still die from smoking, costing the NHS £2.7 Billion annually: obviously, these victims would otherwise live forever and cost the taxpayer nothing.
The drive to hound smoking parents into giving up the habit is, apparently, being led by Professor Terence Stephenson, President of the Royal College of Paediatric Health. Terry admits that some critics will see the rules as “too draconian and the trickling of nanny state rules again”.
I think the Prof has got it wrong. What the government should do is insist that any family with children should be forced to have a social worker living with them in their home. They could be called “Family Friends”, and in addition to keeping a constant watch on parents to ensure that they’re not lighting up in front of their kids – or, indeed, cadging fags off them – they could also look out for other forms of anti-social behaviour:
• Check that waste items are being placed in the proper receptacles prior to collection
• Monitor all child-parent interactions for signs of inappropriate contact
• Make sure that electronic equipment is switched off rather than left in standby
mode – and that lights are switched off in rooms when no member of the family is
using them
• Go through the contents of the family fridge once a day to identify and destroy
unsuitable items – i.e. those with high fat content, too many additives, high calorific
value or excessive packaging
• Make regular sweeps of bookshelves and magazine racks to ensure that all material
meets with legislative guidelines on race, religion, gender and disability
discrimination
• To receive a form listing the programmes parents wish to record on Sky + or any
other form of DVD recorder
• Check lists of any presents parents intend buying for their offspring
• To be present whenever television or DVDs are being viewed to ensure that
sufficient horror is always displayed at news items covering areas of legitimate
social concern – unemployment, housing shortages, exploitation of child labour,
hate crimes etc.
Any infraction of the rules would lead to family members being removed from the domestic environment by police – “Family Crime” would take priority over all other calls on police time. If caught smoking, the relevant parents would be removed from the home indefinitely the family would be designated a “failing family” and the “family friend” would be designated the legal head of the household until the children have voluntarily left home, or been shot or been incarcerated themselves (obviously this last eventuality is unlikely, given its is envisaged that all available prison space would be taken up by by those found guilty of Parent Crimes).
The Family Friend would be provided with their own room, with kitchen facilities and an en suite bathroom. They would be specifically ordered not to do any form of housework, in case this compromised the high standards of vigilance and effectiveness demanded of social workers. If either or both parents are employed in the private sector, they will pay the Family Friend’s wages. If the parents are employed in the public sector, the Family Friend’s wages will be paid out of general taxation.
Obviously if any family refuses to accommodate a Family Friend, they will face imprisonment and the confiscation of all their assets. The only exceptions will be any family working in the public sector, because they know how to behave, or those living in council accommodation who have already been in trouble with the authorities in connection with abusing or neglecting children. (We must protect the human rights of those who have already proved themselves to be violent or perverted anti-social incompetents: besides they can be jolly dangerous, and their houses or flats will probably be unpleasant to live in.) In addition, same sex parents and those not actually married will be exempt. This would obviously mean the main burden falling on decent, law-abiding married people who don’t regularly call on the rest of us to bail them out of the mess they’ve got themselves into – bastards!
By implementing this forward-looking, socially effective legislation, the government would be able to find jobs for several million otherwise utterly unemployable left-wingers, and this would all be paid for by employable people who are already working their socks off to pay the taxes that keep the public sector afloat.
Result!
No comments:
Post a Comment